Loan Review – July 2018

Monthly Commentary

Two pugilists eyed each other to start the month: One, the reigning champion,
secondary loan prices and the other, new issue supply. Secondary loan prices had
its knees buckle from a solid right cross from new issue supply delivered in June,
however, the market regained its footing in July. Just like a boxer, the loan market
started the month/round tentatively. Banks launched new issues with concessions
to the secondary. But as the month wore on, it became apparent that demand from
loan investors remained stable amid very low supply. By month end, the market
demonstrated strength as investment banks began to flex deals tighter to levels inside
of original price talk.

Performance

In July, the Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan Index (CS LLI) and the S&P Leveraged Loan
Index (S&P/LSTA) were up 0.83% and 0.74%, respectively.

Year to date, ending July 31, the CS LLI was up 3.20% and the S&P/LSTA was
up 2.91%.

For the 12 months ending July 31, the CS LLI was up 4.72% and the S&P/LSTA
was up 4.42%.

Risk outperformed as Distressed and Triple Cs led all categories in July. Interestingly,
Double B loans outperformed Single B loans but all categories outperformed
the coupon of the index. On a year-to-date basis, lower quality has continued to
outperform higher quality with distressed loans registering the best returns and Split
Triple Bs registering the worst.

Total Return By Rating

Source: Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan Index

Sector Performance

All sectors in the CS LLI provided a positive return during the month. The top performing sectors in July were Retail (+1.22%),
Transportation (+1.18%) and Food and Drug (+1.05%).

In the last 12 months, Metals, Energy and Utility have led all sectors with total returns of 8.28%, 6.71% and 6.69%, respectively.
In contrast, Food/Tobacco, Consumer Non-Durables and Consumer Durables were the worst performing sectors with returns
of 4.17%, 2.62% and -4.28%, respectively. Food/Tobacco’s underperformance relates primarily to relative value as most of the
sector trades with very tight spreads relative to the broader index. The consumer driven sectors have been impacted largely based
on concerns surrounding the fundamental change in the way consumers buy products. These concerns have weighed on both
consumer sectors. Specifically, within the durable category, one borrower represents a substantial portion of the sector and that
company’s underperformance has weighed on the entire sector returns.

Industry Returns

Source: Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan Index

Credit Suisse Leverage Loan prices increased 31 basis points in July while the average bid of the S&P LCD flow-name loan
composite started the month at 99.23% and ended the month higher at 99.65.

Average Loan Flow-Name Bid

Source: LCD, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

Technical Conditions

Leveraged loan funds reported an inflow totaling approximately $900 million during the month of July. Total assets under
management for the dedicated loan mutual fund base ended July at $149 billion, which compares to an all-time high of $154 billion
in April 2014. On a year-to-date basis, inflows for loan mutual funds total +$13.8 billion compared to a +$13.1 billion inflow in 2017.

Institutional new issuance declined to $29 billion in July and is likely to remain light in August, which is typically the slowest month
of the year. On a year-to-date basis, institutional new issue is down 6.1% from the first seven months of 2017.

Supply Eased in July

Source: Credit Suisse, S&P LCD

Repricings, which dominated the loan landscape for the past year and a half, have disappeared amid the price volatility that began
at the end of May. There were no traditional loan repricings over the past month, however, BJ’s announced a proposed repricing on
the last day of the month. On a YTD basis, Acquisitions, LBOs and merger volume represented 57% of actual new issuance.

YTD - Institutional Volume ($311.7B)

Source: LCD, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

Amid strong inflows, the trailing 12-month returns continued to pace slightly below 4.5%. The bounce in prices did little to impact
the LTM returns as July 2017 had also produced a large return.

Inflows and Rolling LTM Returns

Source: LCD, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

July saw new issue spread widening month-over-month. However, as previously mentioned, it did feel like a lot of the issuance (at
month-end) was flexing tighter. On a year-to-date basis, new issue spreads in July were 10.7% wider for double Bs and 2.0% wider
for single Bs. Spreads are still tighter on a 12-month basis for both double Bs and single Bs. The spread for the CS LLI ended June
at roughly L+344 basis points. This is the tightest spreads have been for the CS LLI since September 2010.

New Issue Spread Changes

Source: LCD, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

In terms of new issue yields, double Bs were wider month-over-month while single Bs remained pretty close to flat. On a year-to-date
basis, double B yields were 145 basis points wider while single B yields were 118 basis points wider. Most of this was driven
by 3-Month LIBOR as it was up 65 basis points during the year.

Average New-Issue Yields

Source: LCD, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

The default rate continued to fall in July as the S&P/LSTA Leveraged Loan Index increased by 2 basis points to 1.97% by principal
amount. There were no defaults in July.

The last 12-month default tally is 19. Oil & Gas defaults lead all categories with six while Retail is close behind with four.

Valuation

Since 1992, the average 3-year discount margin (DM) for the CS LLI is 461 basis points. If the global financial crisis (2008 & 2009)
is excluded, the 3-year discount margin for the CS LLI is 416 basis points. At month end, the 3-year DM (388 basis points) hovers
close to the same levels it has been for all of 2018, which is its tightest level since October 2007.

The DM spread differential between double Bs and single Bs widened by 7 basis points from August 2017 to July 2018 and is still
37 basis points wider than the historical spread differential.

3-Year Discount Margin Differential Between BBs and Single Bs

Source: Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan Index

CS LLI Snapshot

Source: Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan Index

Summary & Looking Forward

As of July 31, the S&P/LSTA Index imputed default rate was 1.16% and, with the exception of April 2018, this was its tightest level
since October 2007.

The loan market was driven by technical characteristics in July. As reduced M&A activity led to less new issue, the inflows to retail
funds and CLO growth contributed to the imbalance that has dominated much of the past year and a half. Consequently, prices
grinded higher and the loan market produced its second strongest monthly return since January 2018.

The new issue forward calendar signals an increase to levels closer to those of June but much of that new issuance will not be
syndicated until after Labor Day. This, combined with the fact that some bankers estimate upwards of 100 CLO warehouses are
currently outstanding, would suggest that we will need a constant supply of new issue or an increase in outflows from retail funds
to remain technically balanced.

Media Attachments

Legal Disclosures

No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of S&P Global Market Intelligence or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P Global Market Intelligence’s opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P Global Market Intelligence assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P Global Market Intelligence does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P Global Market Intelligence has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P Global Market Intelligence does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives.

S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain non-public information received in connection with each analytical process.

S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P’s public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.